Document Type: Full Lenght Research Article
Author
University of Isfahan, Iran
Abstract
Keywords
Main Subjects
The convection simultaneously driven by temperature and concentration gradients are often called either doublediffusive or thermosolutal convection. Doublediffusive convection is an attractive subject due to its wide scientific applications such as oceanography, astrophysics, geology, biology and chemical processes [1]. This aspect of fluid dynamics has been gained considerable attentions from the both of theoretical and experimental researchers because of its importance and wide practical applications such as electronic device cooling, multishield structures used for nuclear reactors, float gas production, crystal growth, drying processes, chemical reactors, and many others [26]. Based on that, wide advanced models as well as research methods have been developed to better understand the physical phenomena in involved in doublediffusive convection. Among the literature published on this subject, Lee & Hyun [8], and Hyun & Lee [9], numerically studied the doublediffusive convection in a rectangular enclosure with aiding and opposing temperature and concentration gradients. Their solution was significantly satisfied the experimental results. Oztop & Dagatekin numerically investigated the steady mixed convection in a twosided liddriven enclosure [10]. Results elucidate that the heat transfer enhances as Richardson number value decreases. AlAmiri et al., utilized numerical simulations to look through the steady doublediffusive convection in a square liddriven cavity [11]. Results demonstrate that heat transfer enhances as the buoyancy ratio increases. Thermosolutal convection with temperature and concentration gradients at the same time in a rectangular enclosure was studied by Qin et al, [12]. They used a highorder compact scheme in their study. Jena et al., researched on the transient process of buoyancyopposed thermosolutal convection of micropolar fluids [13]. Bhattacharya and Das also used numerical techniques to investigate the steady thermosolutal natural convection flow inside a usual liddriven cavity [14]. It has been shown that Rayleigh number is an important parameter in the heat transfer variation. Wang et al., performed regularized Lattice Boltzmann method (LBM) to study thermosolutal convection in the vertical cavity [15]. It has been shown that heat and mass transfer are attenuated as the cavity aspect ratio enhances.
It is well known that the fluid flow is simultaneously affected by temperature and concentration gradients as well in the doublediffusive convection flow. In some cases, the extra thermal and mass diffusivity called Dufour and Soret effects, respectively, affect on the thermosolutal flow characteristics to some extent. Soret effect is the extra mass diffusivity caused by the temperature gradient, while Dufour effect refers to the energy flux created by the concentration gradient. The Soret and Dufour effects are called SDeffects hereinafter for the sake of brevity. SDeffects are ignored in many cases due to their order of magnitude respect to the effects described by Fourier’s and Fick’s laws. Moreover, they have usually considered as the secondorder phenomena. Nevertheless, in some engineering and industrial applications such as chemical reactors, solidification of binary alloys, groundwater pollutant migration, hydrology and geosciences, when temperature and concentration gradients are large enough, the SDeffects could not be ignored and should be taken into account to complete the accurate simulation. In those cases, the temperature and concentration equations become coupled with each other. Recently, some investigators have been conducted numerical and analytical studies to study doublediffusive convection when SDeffects were not neglected.
Malashetty & Gaikward studied numerically the influence of SDeffects on thermosolutal convection in an unbounded vertically stratified system [16]. Rebai et al., investigate doublediffusive convection in a square cavity filled with binary fluid mixture using the both numerical and analytical methods [17]. Soret effect was just considered by them. Bhuvaneswari et al., performed numerical simulations to investigate mixed convection flow with just Soret effect in a regular twosided liddriven square enclosure [18]. They looked into the relation of the lid's movement direction and transport phenomena, and found that both of heat and mass transfer are attenuated if the walls move in the same directions. Actually, they did not consider the influence of Soret effect alone, because all of their numerical simulations performed at a constant Soret coefficient. Wang et al., used an unsteady numerical model to research on the influence of SDeffects on thermosolutal convection in a horizontal rectangular enclosure [19]. Results show that heat and mass transfer increase as the aspect ratio decreases. Their simulations performed in a stable cavity with no moving lid(s) and so they did not study the effects of shear forces on the doublediffusive convection. Recently, Ren & Chen utilized the LBM to study doublediffusive convection in a vertical enclosure with SDeffects [20]. They found that the average Nusselt and Sherwood numbers were increased with increasing Rayleigh number, Prandtl number, Lewis number, Soret and Dufour coefficients. Kefayati also used the LBM to examine doublediffusive convection with SDeffects in an inclined porous cavity [21]. The results prove that heat and mass transfer are sensitive greatly to the inclination angle. Wang et al., utilized an accurate finite volume method based on SIMPLE algorithm to investigate numerically an oscillatory doublediffusive convection in a horizontal cavity with SDeffects [22]. They found that doublediffusive convection develops from steady state convection dominated to chaotic flow as buoyancy ratio increases.
In all of the above studies, a constant set of Soret and Dufour coefficients was assumed during the simulations. On the other hand, to the author's best knowledge, the effect of SDeffects on the various modes of heat transfer has not been analysed yet. To be more precise, the contribution of each modes of heat transfer and in particular, the influence of extra mass and heat diffusions on those contributions have not been studied yet. In addition, although the kinetic energy is a key factor in the design and optimization of thermal systems, the influence of SDeffects on the total energy of the thermosolutal systems has not been considered, yet. Based on the above story, the main purpose of the present study is to characterize the unsteady thermosolutal convection with SDeffects in one hand, and analyse the influence of SDeffects on the various modes of heat transfer as well as the total energy of the system in the other hand.
The physical model configuration which consists of a square enclosure with just top moving wall in its own plane at constant velocity , is displayed in Fig. 1. The top and bottom walls are maintained isothermally at uniform temperatures and respectively, . The opposite boundary conditions are assumed for concentration at top and bottom walls, when those are maintained at concentrations and correspondingly, . The vertical walls are assumed adiabatic and impermeable. This illustration creates a gravitationallyunstable temperature and concentration gradients and results in a thermosolutal/doublediffusive convection.
Fig. 1: Schematic diagram of the computational model.
The enclosure has an aspect ratio of unity () and dry air is assumed as the working fluid, . Fluid is also assumed Newtonian and incompressible except for the density in the buoyancy term of the momentum equation in the vertical direction, according to the Bousinesq approximation. Accordingly, the density variation due to both temperature and concentration gradients can be written as:
where and, are the thermal and concentration expansion coefficients, respectively. With these assumptions, the fundamental governing equations, including continuity, momentum, energy, and concentration (mass) equations can be expressed as:
(1) 

(2) 

(3) 

(4) 

(5) 

where , , , , , are kinematic viscosity, gravity acceleration, thermal diffusivity, diffusion coefficient, Soret and Dufour coefficients, respectively. The governing equations are then nondimensionalized using the following dimensionless variables:
where is the characteristic time , is the characteristic pressure , is the characteristic temperature, and is the characteristic particle concentration. Following Barletta Zanchini [23], the characteristic temperature and concentration are assumed as and , respectively. Therefore, the dimensionless form of governing equations are:
(6) 
(7) 
(8) 
(9) 
(10) 
The buoyancy ratio , Lewis number , Richardson number , Dufour coefficient , and Soret coefficient , are defined as:
Richardson number value ususally illustrates the importance of natural convection relative to the forced convection, whereby the flow is dominated by forced and natural convction when and , respectively. However, the boundary conditions in the dimensionless form are so:
To examine the heat and mass transfer within the enclosure, the average Nusslet and Sherwood numbers on the horizontal walls with maximum temperature and concentration are examined. For this purpose, the local Nusselt and Sherwood numbers along the horizontal bottom and top walls, respectively, are defined as:
(11)
(12)
The average Nusselt and Sherwood numbers then can be calculated as:
(13)
It should be noted that the different boundary conditions are implied for temperature and concentration to better understand the influence of the extra available diffusions on the fluid characteristics and transport phenomena. To better understand and discuss the heat transport processes, the different modes of heat transfer, i.e. conductive and convective modes, across the enclosure are also examined by the relation proposed by Cheng [24]. For this purpose, Nusselt number along the vertical midplane of the enclosure is evaluated by the following equation:
(14)
where the first and second terms of this equation represent the contributions of heat transfer because of the conductive and convective modes, respectively. Further examination of the total kinetic energy is also implemented in this study. It is calculated using the expression proposed before by Goyan through [25]:
(15)
This equation is calculated on all of the grid nodes and averaged during final 1000 final time steps. The temporal variation of total kinetic energy is also analyzed in further to better examine the stationary state conditions.
The dimensionless governing equations, Eqs. (6)(10), are firstly discretized on a staggered grid by a finite volume method developed by Patankar [26]. The convection terms are discretized using the QUICK scheme, while a secondorder AdamsBashforth explicit scheme is implemented for the unsteady terms. The SIMPLE algorithm is then employed to solve the discretized equations. The effect of concentration is also taken into account by using pressure correction method to obtain the real velocity field. The averaged Sherwood and Nusselt numbers are calculated using Simpson's integration rule.
The validation procedure of the utilized method had to be done in order to check the code credibility. This is imposed as well as the convergence and grid independency tests in further steps. The time step is set close to during all simulations similar to the study of Ouertatani et al. [27]. The heat and mass transfer characteristics in addition to the fluid flow patterns have been reported when the steady state conditions are achieved. The unsetady patterns of the studied thermosolutal system are illustrated in Fig. 2, where the temporal variations of isotherm and isoconcentration contours are presented. It can be seen that after , steady state conditions are achieved. The steady state conditions are also examined by the investigation of typical temporal variations of total kinetic energy in Fig. 3. It is observed that after an initial unsteadiness, doublediffusive convection in various regimes become as steady as the total kinetic energy attains a canstant value. The convergence of the numericall results is also employed and the following criterion is satisfied on each time step.
Here, the generic variable illustrates the set of , , , or , while represents the iteration number in each individual time step. The subscript sequence represents the space coordinates of the grid node. The simulations were performed for three various uniform grids, i.e. , , and , for an especific case when , and , and then the results were compared to gether in order to sure on grid independency. The obtained results have an excellent agreement and so, grid was used in according to the proper accuracy as well as CPU consuming time.
considering simulated accuracy and CPU time in the range of variables adequate, results are obtained using node points .
The utilized method was validated against published results of AlAmiri et al., [11] and Teamah & ElMaghlany [28] to sure on the accuracy of the future obtained results. Hence, numerical simulations in the absence of SDeffects, , were performed for doublediffusive mixed convection flow in a vertical square enclosure with the uniformly imposed high and low temperature as well as concentration along the lower and upper walls, respectively. Fig. 4 shows the streamlines, isotherms, and isoconcentration distributions with, , , , and , obtained by (a) present code, (b) Teamah & ElMaghlany [28], and (c) AlAmiri et al. [11]. The figures show a good agreement between the results obtained by the present code and the others. Another test is conducted to check the accuracy of the utilized method, whereby the stream function values at the primary vortex location were computed for two different Reynolds number, i.e. 100 and 400, and are compared with the results obtained by AlAmiri et al. [11] and Screibr & Keller [29] in Table 1. It can be seen that an excellent agreemnt was achieved between registered data results. Furtheremore, the average Nusselt number obtained by the present method and the results achieved by Sharif [30] and Malleswaran & Sivasankaran [31] are compared in Table 2. The results obtained by the present method have an acceptable aggreement with the available results, especially at the larger and values.
Table 1. Comparison of primary vortex stream function.
Re 
Present work 
Ref. [11] 
Ref. [29] 
100 
0.1031 
0.1033 
0.1033 
400 
0.1137 
0.1139 
0.1138 
As was mentioned before, the main aim of the present work is to characterize the thermosolutal/doublediffusive convection flow, heat and mass transfer in a square enclosure and in the presence of Soret and Dufour effects. For this purpose, numerical simulations are carried out with the validated method for different Richardson numbers (), when is kept constant at 10^{4} and Re is varied between 31.6 to 1000. Besides, Soret and Dufour effects are employed where is kept constant at 0.25, and is varied between 0 to 3. Schmidt number sets equal to Prandtl number, and so . The assumed value of Lewis number represents a same contribution for both of heat and mass transfer, whereby it makes an upportunity to stduy the influence of Richardson number individually. Buoyancy ratio , is also set to unity to consider similar effects for mass and thermal diffusions. Streamlines, isotherms, and isoconcentrations of the cases with different and various sets of coefficients are displayed in Fig. 5. As can be seen that an unicellular clockwise primary vortex almost occupies whole the cavity in all the studied cases.
Fig. 3. Temporal variations of total kinetic energies for various Richardson numbers when .
In fact, the fluid rises up from the heated bottom wall due to the thermal buoyancy forces and flows down along the cold side. The competition between forced flow introduced by top moving wall, solutal and thermal buoyancy forces have been formed a primary rotating cell. If the isotherm patterns of the cases with are compared together, it can be seen that the concentration of thermal boundary layers near the heated wall reduces as Richardson number enhances. To help to better understand, the isotherm patterns of the cases with are represented in Fig. 6. When Richardson number has its lowest value (Fig. 6(a)), Reynolds number is kept constant at 1000, the flow was dominated by forced convection introduced by top moving lid and the convection circulation was developed greatly. In the other words, shear forces push the convection to penetrate much deeper into the enclosure. A similar observation was reported before in the studies of AlAmiri et al. [11], and Teamah & ElMaghlany [28], where the double diffusive mixed convection in the absence of SDeffects was investigated numerically.
However, with either decreasing Reynolds number or increasing Richardson number (Figs. 6(b)&(c)), the opposing action of thermal buoyancy forces against forced flow was pronounced, whereby the concentration of the thermal boundary layers in the vicinity of the hot wall was reduced. When (Fig. 6(d)), the entire isotherm lines were became parallel to the horizontal walls. This configuration demonstrate that heat was transferred mostly by conduction mode, whereby the enclosure could be assumed as a quasiconduction domain. It should be noted that the isotherm and isoconcentration patterns in the cases with are almost similar due to the value of Lewis number, i.e. . This fact is not repeated when either the extra mass or thermal diffusion is introduced.
Table 2. Comparison of the average Nusselt numbers.


Average 
Nusselt 
number 
Present study 
Ref. [30] 
Ref. [31] 


10^{2} 
3.94 
4.05 
4.08 
400 
10^{4} 
3.72 
3.82 
3.84 

10^{6} 
1.22 
1.17 
1.10 

10^{2} 
6.35 
6.55 
6.48 
1000 
10^{4} 
6.31 
6.50 
6.47 

10^{6} 
1.78 
1.81 
1.66 
Fig. 5 also depicts that at the lower and moderate values of Dufour coefficient, i.e. 0.25 and 1, the influence of SDeffects on fluid flow, isotherms, and isoconcentrations seems to be insignificant. In addition, the influence of SDeffects on even fluid flow can be ignored when Richardson number is large enough. Nevertheless, Figs. 5(c)&(d) show that the enhancement of Dufour coefficient could develop fluid flow and transport phenomena when flow is in the mixed or natural convection regime. The extra thermal diffusion within the enclosure, which was increased by increasing Dufour coefficient, is in the direction of concentration gradient, and so has an aiding and opposing action on the shear forces and thermal buoyancy forces, respectively. As it was mentioned earlier, the shear forces introduced by top moving wall, have a tendency to push the convection into the enclosure, whereby the thermal boundary layers are concentrated greatly near the hot wall with further decreasing of Richardson number. Therefore, the competition between forced convection on one side and thermal buoyancy forces as well as extra thermal diffusion introduced by SDeffects on the other side, forms thermal eddies near the heated wall. Those thermal eddies cause a distortion in the thermal boundary layers even if when the enclosure is a quasiconductive domain. In addition, the extra thermal diffusion disturbs the equilibrium between mass and thermal diffusing, assumed before by implying, and so isotherms and isoconcentrations are not the same here.
Figs. 5(c)&(d) represents that when Richardson number was increased and so forced convection was ground by natural flow, the extra thermal diffusion along with the thermal buoyancy forces have formed the secondary eddies at the left bottom of the enclosure. It can be seen that the secondary eddy formation is augmented with increasing either Richardson number or Dufour coefficient. On the other hand, it seems that the variation of Dufour coefficient was also affected to some extent on the isoconcentration contours. This is attributed to the fact that the mass transfer rate was affected to some extent by convection activities.
Fig. 4. Streamlines, isotherms, and isoconcentrations for , , , and , obtained by (a) present method, (b) Teamah & ElMaghlany [28], and (c) AlAmiri et al. [11].
Fig. 5: Streamlines (left column), isotherms (middle column), and isoconcentrations (right column) for (a) , (b) , (c) , and (d) , when and .
(a) 
(b) 
(c) 
(d) 
Fig. 6: Isotherm patterns for (a) , (b) , (c) , and (d) , when and .
(a) 
(b) 
(c) 
(d) 
Fig. 7: Isotherm patterns for (a) , (b) , (c) , and (d) , when and .
(a) 
(b) 
(c) 
(d) 
Fig. 8: Isoconcentration patterns for (a) , (b) , (c) , and (d) , when and .
(a) 
(b) 
(c) 
(d) 
Fig. 9: Horizontal midvelocity profiles for (a) , (b) , (c) , and (d) . In all of cases .
(a) 
(b) 
(c) 
(d) 
Fig. 10: Vertical midvelocity profiles for (a) , (b) , (c) , and (d) . In all of cases .
(a) 
(b) 
Fig. 11: Average (a) Nusselt, and (b) Sherwood numbers, when for all cases.
(a) 
(b) 
(c) 
(d) 
(e) 
(f) 
(g) 
(h) 
Fig. 12: The vertical distributions of conduction mode of heat transfer along the midplane of the square enclosure for (a) , (b) , (c) , and (d) , and the vertical distributions of convection mode of heat transfer along the midplane of the square enclosure for (a) , (b) , (c) , and (d) , where in all of cases
To better examine the behavior of transport phenomena in the presence of SDeffects, the isotherm and isoconcentration patterns for the cases with largest value () are represented in Figs. 7&8, respectively. Figs. 7(a)(d) show that the thermal boundary layers form upper than the bottom heated wall, whereby the thermal eddies separate those boundary layers from the wall. It can also be seen that the intensity of those thermal eddies was augmented by increasing Richardson number. In other words, the thermal eddies due to the extra thermal diffusion were intensified when flow was dominated by natural convection. On the other hand, the value of isotherm lines increases as Richardson number enhances. This fact show that temperature gradient within the cavity increases as the Richardson number enhances. Meanwhile, the negative value of isotherm line represents the loss of buoyancy forces across the enclosure. Figs. 8(a)(d) depict that isoconcentration patterns were affected by Richardson number variation when Dufour coefficient is a large value, i.e. . This feature may be due to the nonzero value of the Soret coefficient. As was observed before in Figs. 7(a)(d), the temperature gradient across the enclosure enhances with increasing Richardson number and Dufour coefficient simultaneously. The large temperature gradient in according to the nonzero value of Soret coefficient produces extra mass diffusion which affects to some extent on isoconcentration patterns.
The horizontal and vertical velocity profiles along the midplane of the enclosure are displayed in Figs. 9&10, respectively. As can be seen that when, the influence of SDeffects on velocity profiles seems to be insignificant in spite of some observed minor deviations. This fact again demonstrates that the influence of SDeffects on fluid characteristics can be ignored when flow was dominated by forced convection. In addition, Figs. 9(b)(d) show that the cases with largest Dufour coefficient have largest horizontal velocity components near the heated wall. This feature was also pronounced with increasing Richardson number. The formation of thermal eddies in cases with largest Dufour coefficient which was explained before can be recognized as the main reason of this feature. However, it was denoted earlier that the Dufour effect has an opposite effect on the thermal buoyancy forces provoked by the heated wall. This fact is observed again in Figs. 10(a)&(b), whereby the vertical component of the velocity at the bottom half of the enclosure was reduced by increasing Dufour coefficient. In order to assess the convective heat and mass transfer within the enclosure, the variations of the average Nusselt and Sherwood numbers as a function of Dufour coefficient for all of the studied cases are elucidated in Fig. 11. The joint effect of varying and upon the heat and mass transfer processes is undoubtedly noticeable in these plots. Fig. 11(a) shows that the average Nusselt number variations are in good agreement with isotherm plots, previously commented. For instance, for either larger Richardson number or smaller Dufour coefficients, the average Nusselt numbers are small to some extent. This fact represents that the conduction is the dominant mechanism of transport phenomena here. Furthermore, Fig. 11(b) shows that the average Sherwood number was enhanced with increasing either Dufour coefficient or Richardson number. In according to the nonzero value of Soret coefficient and implemented boundary conditions, it seems that the augmentation of temperature gradient caused by increasing either heat diffusion or thermal buoyancy forces, causes an enhancement in mass transfer through the enclosure. The influence of pertinent parameters on the various heat transfer modes are illustrated in Fig. 12. In particular, Figs. 12(a)(d) show the variations of convective mode of heat transfer within the enclosure. First, it can be observed that the convective mode of heat transfer at the bottom half of the enclosure and especially in the vicinity of the heated wall was augmented by further increasing of Richardson number, whereby the bottom peak of the figures was moved from the negative side towards the positive side with an enhancement of value. When , the aiding action of Dufour effect against the shear forces, increases convective mode of heat transfer at the core of the enclosure. In contrast, the opposite action of the extra heat diffusion against the thermal buoyancy forces reduces the convective mode of heat transfer near the heated wall. With an enhancement of Richardson number, the influence of thermal buoyancy forces was expanded from near the heated wall towards the core of the enclosure. This fact causes that the competition of Dufour effect and thermal buoyancy forces moves towards the upper half of the enclosure. With further increasing of Richardson number and when flow was dominated by natural convection, the extra heat diffusion has an aiding effect on the convection recirculation of the enclosure, whereby the convective mode of heat transfer at the core of the cavity was improved when Dufour coefficient enhances.
The effect of pertinent parameters on the conductive mode of heat transfer is shown in Figs. 12(e)(h). In here, the variation of the normal temperature variations along the vertical midplane of the enclosure is illustrated. When was decreased to 0.01, the forced convection invigorates and heat transfer penetrates much deeper into the enclosure. This fact causes that the conductive mode of heat transfer in forced convection regime is submerged at the core of the enclosure and tended towards a zero value. However, it can be seen that the absolute value of the normal temperature variations near the heated wall was enhanced by decreasing Richardson number. This fact represents the concentrated thermal boundary layers in that region which observed before in Fig. 5. In addition, the extra heat diffusion has an opposing action with respect to the conductive mode of heat transfer near the heated wall. The thermal eddies which was formed by increasing Dufour coefficient, observed before in Fig. 7, can be recognized as the main reason of the behaviour of conductive mode of heat transfer near the heated wall.
This work is wrapped by the investigation of the total kinetic energy variation across the enclosure. To help to better understand, the cases with were just added here. The variation of average total kinetic energy as a function of Dufour coefficient for various convection regimes is represented in Fig. 13. It can be observed that was increased with reducing Richardson number when the influence of the extra heat diffusion was ignored, . However, the variations of total kinetic energy as a function of Dufour coefficient manifests variety fashions depends mainly on the Richardson number value. In moderate and small Richardson numbers, it was reduced with increasing of the Dufour coefficient, while the opposite was achieved for the cases with . This can be due to the influence of Dufour coefficient on the convective mode of heat transfer observed before in Fig. 12. In other words, increasing the convective mode of heat transfer would improve total kinetic energy of the enclosure.
In further, a quadratic curve fitting of the average total kinetic energy with Dufour coefficient is implemented [32]. The fitted model is the form:
(16)
The values of coefficients a, b, and c with standard error of quadratic curve fitting for various Richardson numbers are calculated and registered in Table 3.
In addition a linear curve fitting was also utilized on a, b, and c coefficients and Richardson number, whereby the following relation is obtained for total kinetic energy as follows: (17) The variations of total kinetic energy obtained by the relation above and data results achieved by numerical method are compared in Fig. 14. An acceptable agreement is observed between the obtained results. Therefore, Eq. (17) can well be utilized for estimating the average total kinetic energy of doublediffusive mixed convection in presence of Dufour effect.
Fig. 13. The average total kinetic energy versus Dufour coefficient for diferent Richardson numbers
Fig. 14. The comparison of obtained results by numerical method (Num.) and estimated by Eq. (17) (Est.).
The present work addressed a numerical characterization of thermosolutal mixed convection in a liddriven square enclosure and in the presence of extra mass and energy diffusions named Soret and Dufour effects. The effects of varying Richardson number as well as Soret and Dufour coefficients on the resulting thermosolutal convection are examined and investigated. In addition, the influence of those pertinent parameters on the heat and mass transfer, various modes of heat transfer, and total kinetic energy of the thermosolutal system are evaluated and discussed in detail. The main conclusions earned from this study are listed below:

Acknowledgements
The author wish to aknowledge anonymous reviwers whose constructive comments improved the presentaion of this work.
Nomenclature
B buoyancy ratio
C concentration ()
C_{0} characteristic concentration
D_{m} diffusion coefficient ()
Df dimensionless Dufour coefficient
g gravity acceleration ()
Gr_{C} solutal Grashof number
Gr_{T} thermal Grashof number
L enclosure with ()
Le Lewis number
Nu Nusselt number
p fluid pressure ()
Pr Prandtl number
Re Reynolds number
Ri Richardson number
Sc Schmidt number
Sh Sherwood number
Sr dimensionless Soret coefficient
T fluid temperature ()
T_{0} characteristic fluid temperature
U_{0} absolute lid velocity ()
Greek
thermal diffusivity ()
concentration expansion coefficient ()
thermal expansion coefficient ()
Soret coefficient ()
Dufour coefficient ()
kinematic viscosity of fluid ()
dimensionless concentration
stream function
fluid density ()
characteristic fluid density
dimensionless temperature
subscript
h high
l low